5 ms·

A nice PR piece, but for context, Apple is still largely using its vast resources to enrich investors, not workers. Source: https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/5/1

A nice PR piece, but for context, Apple is still largely using its vast resources to enrich investors, not workers. Source: https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/5/1/18525672/apple-stock-earnings-tax-cut-buyback-cook https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/5/1/18525672/apple-stock-ear...

notafraudster 7y ago
That might be true, but also the premise of the PR piece isn't about workers, it's about the extended "job footprint" -- as in the industries of app developers, hardware and parts manufacturers, etc. that Apple "supports" rather than directly employs. It's not super obvious how a tax cut to Apple would lead to them, like, voluntarily overpaying part suppliers. The motivating examples in the article include a company that makes battery testing equipment and a company that makes lasers. Direct employees account for only 3% of what they're talking about. I don't think this takes away from the idea that Apple like most companies is it in to make boatloads of cash and to hell with everyone else, but your comment seems in response to the headline rather than the article.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  The premise is that this is a fluff piece warning politicians to take it easy on Apple lest these precious jobs should disappear.
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    I'm personally a fan of getting democracies to play Dance! Fetch! Roll Over! atta boy
  - chrisco255 7y ago
    What proposals are in place to specifically target Apple for negative legislation?
    - jedberg 7y ago
      You’ve phrased your question in a disingenuous way. You know it’s illegal to target specific companies with legislation. This piece is clearly in response to the existing and impending Chinese tariffs, and in response to the President’s constant attacks on large companies with his protectionist rhetoric.
      - chrisdhoover 7y ago
        And the democratic presidential runners who denounce business at every turn.
        green-eclipse 7y ago
        Well, Elizabeth Warren has targeted the tech giants. But so has Trump.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        > And the democratic presidential runners who denounce business None have done that; some have denounced specific business practices, and specific businesses for practicing them. That's very different.
      - chrisco255 7y ago
        They make the same PR pieces for Europe: https://www.apple.com/uk/job-creation/ https://www.apple.com/uk/job-creation/ This is nothing new nor unique to Apple. All major businesses tout job creation when they can. They get more clout from it.
  - zepto 7y ago
    Won’t they?
  - malandrew 7y ago
    > lest these precious jobs should disappear. As someone working for another company where some governments often threaten the existence of my job and the jobs of my colleagues, this concern resonates with me.
  - notatoad 7y ago
    >this is a fluff piece It's literally PR hosted on their own press portal. We're you expecting critical journalism?
jjtheblunt 7y ago
I think you've overlooked the fact that enriching investors IS enriching its workers, because they are generally given real stock grants upon employment, and gradually as time goes by. This applies for countless engineers from the company past and present, whom I (as one of them) personally know.
- dcre 7y ago
  The cited 2.4 million only includes 90,000 actual Apple employees.
  - bin0 7y ago
    Right, but all the others still have jobs. That's the point of the 2.4 million: there are the ones employed directly, then those employed by suppliers, suppliers of those suppliers, etc.
    - PunchTornado 7y ago
      your point? the poster said that the tax cuts apple gets profit the shareholders, not the employees or workers in the supply chain. I guess you think we should all be grateful that they gave us a job. They're so good with us.
- rifung 7y ago
  > I think you've overlooked the fact that enriching investors IS enriching its workers, because they are generally given real stock grants upon employment, and gradually as time goes by. Only in the same sense that tax cuts benefits everyone. While technically true, the benefits disproportionately go towards those who are already better off.
  - briandear 7y ago
    They disproportionately go to people that pay taxes. One could argue taxes disproportionately affect people that make more because they pay higher marginal rates. A person making $200k pays a higher percentage than someone making $50k. So by definition, those making more are disproportionately affected by taxes. The government keeps more of every dollar earned from someone making more money. Not sure how that is fair. If we want fairness, everyone pays an identical rate. Making more money doesn’t mean I use more dramatically more government, so why should I pay a higher rate than people who make less? A flat tax is fair and doesn’t punish success (or failure.)
mlindner 7y ago
Except this is completely off topic from the article.
crazygringo 7y ago
It's paying its workers market wages and returning the rest to investors. That's how literally every for-profit company works, and Apple's a for-profit company. Why do you think Apple should be any different?
- rubicon33 7y ago
  Probably because a lot of people are looking around and realizing that "literally every" company should be different. People are getting tired of making "market wages" when the market simply isn't working for them. It's been a long time since wages have even increased, let alone kept pace with cost of living in many areas.
  - crazygringo 7y ago
    Great, but that's got nothing to do with a specific company, and it's not for Apple to do. It's for us to vote for representatives who will implement better taxation and finance and safety net etc. policies, that result in better wages etc. Criticizing Apple is a distraction. Criticize your representatives and vote.
    - viklove 7y ago
      Your view of this is so short sighted and conceited I'd almost say you're an Apple shill, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. We do have to criticize corporations, because of this thing called "regulatory capture." Billion dollar entities like Apple have way more political power than you or I do, and they're using it to protect their fiefdoms while suppressing voter choice to ensure we can't do anything about it. Criticize your representative? Do you mean the one Apple/Google/Exxon/Raytheon spent millions of dollars getting elected? I think they may have what you call a "conflict of interest."
- adventured 7y ago
  > It's paying its workers market wages and returning the rest to investors. The parent comment also isn't telling the entire story. The Fed survey from 2016 indicated that about 52% of American families own stocks, directly or as part of a fund (other surveys support that general figure). A very large number of American families own shares in Apple and own part of its $911 billion market cap. The next counter would be to say that it only really benefits the top 25% of families or similar (those with meaningful equity assets), which would be a goalpost shift.
sdinsn 7y ago
> Apple is still largely using its vast resources to enrich investors, not workers. Every company is trying to enrich investors. That's how capitalism works

notafraudster 7y ago

That might be true, but also the premise of the PR piece isn't about workers, it's about the extended "job footprint" -- as in the industries of app developers, hardware and parts manufacturers, etc. that Apple "supports" rather than directly employs. It's not super obvious how a tax cut to Apple would lead to them, like, voluntarily overpaying part suppliers. The motivating examples in the article include a company that makes battery testing equipment and a company that makes lasers. Direct employees account for only 3% of what they're talking about. I don't think this takes away from the idea that Apple like most companies is it in to make boatloads of cash and to hell with everyone else, but your comment seems in response to the headline rather than the article.

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
The premise is that this is a fluff piece warning politicians to take it easy on Apple lest these precious jobs should disappear.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  I'm personally a fan of getting democracies to play Dance! Fetch! Roll Over! atta boy
- chrisco255 7y ago
  What proposals are in place to specifically target Apple for negative legislation?
  - jedberg 7y ago
    You’ve phrased your question in a disingenuous way. You know it’s illegal to target specific companies with legislation. This piece is clearly in response to the existing and impending Chinese tariffs, and in response to the President’s constant attacks on large companies with his protectionist rhetoric.
    - chrisdhoover 7y ago
      And the democratic presidential runners who denounce business at every turn.
      - green-eclipse 7y ago
        Well, Elizabeth Warren has targeted the tech giants. But so has Trump.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        > And the democratic presidential runners who denounce business None have done that; some have denounced specific business practices, and specific businesses for practicing them. That's very different.
    - chrisco255 7y ago
      They make the same PR pieces for Europe: https://www.apple.com/uk/job-creation/ https://www.apple.com/uk/job-creation/ This is nothing new nor unique to Apple. All major businesses tout job creation when they can. They get more clout from it.
- zepto 7y ago
  Won’t they?
- malandrew 7y ago
  > lest these precious jobs should disappear. As someone working for another company where some governments often threaten the existence of my job and the jobs of my colleagues, this concern resonates with me.
- notatoad 7y ago
  >this is a fluff piece It's literally PR hosted on their own press portal. We're you expecting critical journalism?

jjtheblunt 7y ago

I think you've overlooked the fact that enriching investors IS enriching its workers, because they are generally given real stock grants upon employment, and gradually as time goes by. This applies for countless engineers from the company past and present, whom I (as one of them) personally know.

dcre 7y ago
The cited 2.4 million only includes 90,000 actual Apple employees.
- bin0 7y ago
  Right, but all the others still have jobs. That's the point of the 2.4 million: there are the ones employed directly, then those employed by suppliers, suppliers of those suppliers, etc.
  - PunchTornado 7y ago
    your point? the poster said that the tax cuts apple gets profit the shareholders, not the employees or workers in the supply chain. I guess you think we should all be grateful that they gave us a job. They're so good with us.
rifung 7y ago
> I think you've overlooked the fact that enriching investors IS enriching its workers, because they are generally given real stock grants upon employment, and gradually as time goes by. Only in the same sense that tax cuts benefits everyone. While technically true, the benefits disproportionately go towards those who are already better off.
- briandear 7y ago
  They disproportionately go to people that pay taxes. One could argue taxes disproportionately affect people that make more because they pay higher marginal rates. A person making $200k pays a higher percentage than someone making $50k. So by definition, those making more are disproportionately affected by taxes. The government keeps more of every dollar earned from someone making more money. Not sure how that is fair. If we want fairness, everyone pays an identical rate. Making more money doesn’t mean I use more dramatically more government, so why should I pay a higher rate than people who make less? A flat tax is fair and doesn’t punish success (or failure.)

mlindner 7y ago

Except this is completely off topic from the article.

crazygringo 7y ago

It's paying its workers market wages and returning the rest to investors. That's how literally every for-profit company works, and Apple's a for-profit company. Why do you think Apple should be any different?

rubicon33 7y ago
Probably because a lot of people are looking around and realizing that "literally every" company should be different. People are getting tired of making "market wages" when the market simply isn't working for them. It's been a long time since wages have even increased, let alone kept pace with cost of living in many areas.
- crazygringo 7y ago
  Great, but that's got nothing to do with a specific company, and it's not for Apple to do. It's for us to vote for representatives who will implement better taxation and finance and safety net etc. policies, that result in better wages etc. Criticizing Apple is a distraction. Criticize your representatives and vote.
  - viklove 7y ago
    Your view of this is so short sighted and conceited I'd almost say you're an Apple shill, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. We do have to criticize corporations, because of this thing called "regulatory capture." Billion dollar entities like Apple have way more political power than you or I do, and they're using it to protect their fiefdoms while suppressing voter choice to ensure we can't do anything about it. Criticize your representative? Do you mean the one Apple/Google/Exxon/Raytheon spent millions of dollars getting elected? I think they may have what you call a "conflict of interest."
adventured 7y ago
> It's paying its workers market wages and returning the rest to investors. The parent comment also isn't telling the entire story. The Fed survey from 2016 indicated that about 52% of American families own stocks, directly or as part of a fund (other surveys support that general figure). A very large number of American families own shares in Apple and own part of its $911 billion market cap. The next counter would be to say that it only really benefits the top 25% of families or similar (those with meaningful equity assets), which would be a goalpost shift.

sdinsn 7y ago

> Apple is still largely using its vast resources to enrich investors, not workers. Every company is trying to enrich investors. That's how capitalism works